HOW COVID-19 IS AFFECTING CANADA'S DEFENCE AND AEROSPACE INDUSTRY

On the same subject

• 

  February 13, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

  Senator critiques defence procurement process

  by Chris Thatcher An Ontario Senator says defence procurement needs better oversight and an improved process if it is to avoid the problems affecting the government's efforts to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) CF-188 fighter jet fleet. “The fiasco of fighter jet replacement is the best example of a procurement system that is cumbersome, bureaucratic and beset by political interference,” Senator Nicole Eaton wrote in an article originally published in The Hill Times. “Unless ministers start to devote close attention to the management of major projects, or until the process is overhauled, Canadians can continue to expect poor outcomes and wasted taxpayer dollars.” Eaton is a member of the Senate National Finance Committee, which launched a study last fall into the processes and financial aspects of defence procurement. It held its first hearing on Oct. 30 and expects to conclude later this year. In her article, the senator critiqued the process by which Conservative and Liberal governments have struggled to replace the aging CF-188 Hornets, noting that while both Canada and Australia are members of the U.S.-led Joint Strike Fighter program to develop the F-35, Australia received its first two operational F-35s in December while Canada, as part of an interim measure, is poised to take delivery of the first of 25 “well-used” Australian F-18s. “As we take possession of Australia's scrap, Canada is in the early stages of a minimum five-year-long process to pick a replacement for the F-18, which will be more than 50 years old before it is retired in the 2030s,” she wrote. The current government bears blame for creating some of the problems with the fighter file, she wrote, but “military procurement has bedeviled successive governments, Liberal and Conservative alike.” She attributed part of the problem to political interference for both partisan advantage and regional turf protection, but said the main reason for “paralysis in military procurement in Canada is it is too cumbersome and bureaucratic. Process is paramount and results are secondary. “There are layers of committees, depending on the size of the project, with membership from Public Services and Procurement Canada, National Defence, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development,” she wrote. “The consensus-based decision-making process on which these committees operate is supposed to avoid a big mistake — no doubt an appealing quality for a risk-averse bureaucracy, but the downside is the system is not conducive to fast action. Simply put, the buck stops nowhere.” Eaton suggested that bureaucratic morass has resulted in an inability to spend allotted project budgets, an indication the government could struggle to fulfil the commitments laid out in its 2017 defence policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE). “In the last fiscal year, the policy projected capital spending of $6.1 billion, yet only $3.7 billion was spent. This year, $6.55 billion is called for under SSE, but total appropriations to date amount to $4 billion,” she noted. “Given this poor track record, the idea that military spending can be cranked up by 70 per cent over 10 years, as envisioned in Strong, Secure, Engaged, looks increasingly fanciful. At the Finance committee's first hearing on the procurement system, Patrick Finn, assistant deputy minister, Materiel at the Department of National Defence, and André Fillion, assistant deputy minister for defence and marine procurement at Public Services and Procurement Canada, faced a barrage of questions on ongoing participation in the F-35 program, the authorities and mandates of interdepartmental committees involved in military procurement, and about the challenge of balancing military requirements with equipment costs and opportunities for Canadian industry. “Buying a fighter plane isn't like buying a compact car, and the role of the government is very important. We had to adapt our method of supply to the context of fighter jets,” Fillion told the senators. He said a draft RFP released in late October “was the result of many months of consultation on all five potential options (to replace the CF-188s). “There has been a lot of back and forth over the last several months to make sure that what we are asking meets the requirements of the Air Force and ensures that we do not inadvertently limit the competition. I feel very confident that what we've put together is fair, open and transparent to all the potential suppliers.” Finn said the government had met with and learned lessons from allies who had conducted similar fighter replacement programs. He also dismissed some of the concerns about acquiring used Australian aircraft to fill a gap while the government proceeds with the replacement project. “In our opinion, Canada has the best expertise related to this type of aircraft. Some companies in Montreal do maintenance for the United States and other countries because they have the necessary knowledge,” he said. “This aircraft will really increase our fleet, and it is not the number of aircraft that counts; it is rather the hours of use in the future. We are looking for an aircraft that will remain in service for another 14 years. What is needed is enough hours on the structural side. We will be able to use these aircraft until the entire fleet is no longer in service.” https://www.skiesmag.com/news/senator-critiques-defence-procurement-process

• 

  June 29, 2020 | Local, Aerospace

  After The Shock: Implications For M&A In The Aerospace & Defense Market

  By Adil Khan, Jim Adams and Steve Beckey Forbes; KPMG Contributor Jun 23, 2020 The current economic disruption—coming on the heels of the 737MAX suspension—has varying impact across A&D segments. The impact on commercial aerospace has been immediate and extensive, while the defense sector has largely remained unscathed. However, it is hard to see how it will remain so, given the extensive fiscal measures being taken. What will this mean for M&A in A&D? Some trends are beginning to emerge that will affect the entire deal life-cycle (from deal strategy through integration and value creation). Yet, as in other times of economic disruption, new opportunities will emerge, which leads us to believe that the slowdown of M&A activity will be short-lived. As we enter this next phase, deal makers who adapt quickly to the realities of the new industry landscape could be well positioned to maximize value. Pre COVID-19 environment Not too long ago, commercial aerospace was booming, with year-over-year ramp ups in build rates and record backlogs. There were expectations of another golden decade — further extending the unprecedented 14-year “super up-cycle”, defying the long-standing cyclicality of the sector. However, in 2019, the historic correlation between GDP, air-traffic growth, carrier profitability, orders and build rates was suddenly disrupted. GDP and airline profitability levels remained relatively healthy, but new orders and build rates dropped as the industry grappled with the 737MAX shock, as well as a slowdown in the twin-aisle segment. Other undercurrents also emerged — slowdowns in world trade from escalating tariff tensions, weakness in high-growth geographic markets such as China and India, and declining consumer confidence. In contrast, U.S. defense spending was on the rise, averaging 4 percent1 annual growth over the past 5 fiscal years; the $738 billion FY2020 defense bill2 ensured this momentum would continue. The government services sector was also set to benefit from continued funding increases to modernize IT infrastructure and address evolving national security challenges. With general confidence in the long-term fundamentals of the sector and a favorable budgetary environment, players in certain A&D segments pursued M&A to build scale. Others “re-realized” that content matters and initiated vertical and horizontal integration strategies to capture more value and drive cost competitiveness, or acquired targeted niche capabilities and emerging technologies. We also saw the emergence of Super Tier I's through scale-driving consolidation aimed at broadening capabilities and potentially exerting greater influence on OEMs. Deal volume in the A&D sector reached record levels — almost doubling over the last 5 years and outpacing the broader M&A market by 40 percent.3 Valuations remained elevated on the strength of high bidder interest, limited supply of attractive assets, high A&D stock valuations (which outperformed the S&P 500 by 8 percent),4 as well as healthy balance sheets and strong cash positions. TEV/EBITDA multiples for A&D transactions averaged 11x,5 outpacing increases in the overall M&A market. Although, deal volumes moderated in the second half of 2019, amid elevated uncertainty about defense spending heading into a presidential election year, the overall outlook remained optimistic. COVID-19 impact COVID-19 caused a precipitous collapse in air traffic. With travel restrictions and stay-at-home orders, carriers around the globe made unprecedented cuts to capacity, idled fleets, and began deferring or canceling new aircraft deliveries. Also, the MRO (maintenance, repair, and overhaul) and aftermarket segments, which had benefited from the prolonged 737MAX grounding and high fleet utilization, suddenly faced stiff headwinds. Thus far, the defense industrial base has not experienced a COVID-19 demand shock. There is no noticeable disruption in appropriations or major delays and cancellation of military programs. However, as in the commercial sector, defense contractors are actively monitoring their supply base and taking steps to preserve liquidity, minimize supply chain disruption, and taking measures to comply with CDC and local government guidelines. The range of scenarios for defense spending is bookended by two scenarios: an elevated national security threat that would preserve or accelerate funding, or a reordering of budget priorities to fund social and other mandatory programs, resulting in sequestration-type measures, similar to 2011. With these developments, volatility in the financial markets, lack of access to financing, alternative more pressing liquidity needs by corporates and most importantly, uncertainty in the marketplace, deal flow in A&D has come to an immediate standstill. Several “in-flight” processes have been halted, new deals in the pipeline have been deferred, and even some announced transactions terminated. Access to the new public offering market is effectively closed. The gap in expected valuations between buyers and sellers has widened considerably, due to disparate perceptions of the extent of economic disruption caused by COVID-19; contrasting views on reopening of the economy and the pace of return to normal; and diverse perspectives on what the post-COVID-19 new reality looks like. This has rendered financial forecasts and pre-COVID-19 market perspectives obsolete. Further, the extent and nature of unusual and non-recurring events6 impacting financials, present considerable challenges for deal makers to form a credible view of normalized earnings and cash flows. With the lack of reliable projections, it is nearly impossible to form a credible view on valuations let alone bridge this gap. Additionally, although M&A teams have attempted to navigate through practical challenges with offsite due diligence, virtual facility tours, video conferences, etc., adapting to a virtual M&A environment, especially for cross-border deals, has been challenging. Developments to watch as economies reopen Given the health concerns, changes in social behaviors (some of which may be slow to reverse) and anticipated lead-time to an effective vaccine, a V-shape recovery in air traffic appears increasingly unlikely. As governments move from combating coronavirus to reopening economies, the pace and extent of the economic recovery is expected to vary significantly around the world. Further, some long-lasting or permanent developments may trigger some dramatic shifts in the sector: KPMG Implications for M&A trends and outlook KPMG Although we probably do not expect to see M&A activity return to the pre-crisis levels immediately, we expect M&A activity to drive realignment of the industry landscape in the post COVID-19 environment. Implications for M&A Capabilities As we enter the next phase, deal makers will need to adapt to the realities that impact how deals get done. Examples include: KPMG While the challenges are intimidating, the opportunities will be vast, and those who move quickly and decisively are likely to be rewarded for years to come. Those who take this unique opportunity to prepare and are ready to act will stand ready to reshape the A&D industry. 1. 2019 DoD Comptroller Data (Green Book) 2. Department of Defense 3. CapIQ, Institute for Mergers, Acquisitions, and Alliances 4. Year return, S&P A&D index vs S&P 500 5. Trailing 12-month average to June 2019 and avg. 16x for deals >$500M in value; CapIQ, Dacis Company reports and Press releases 6 Worker furloughs, facility shut-downs, loss of business or order cancellation, idled or underutilized facilities, CARES Act funding, changes to performance-based compensation structures or payouts, health and sanitization related measures, IT infrastructure investments to adapt to remote working environment, deferral of payroll taxes, carryback of NOLs, increased interest expense tax deduction, etc KPMG Contributor

• 

  October 16, 2018 | Local, Naval

  Irving Shipbuilding pushing for two more Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships, all Halifax-class work

  DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Efforts are underway by Irving Shipbuilding to convince the federal government to build two more Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships at its Halifax yard. Irving also wants all Halifax-class frigate maintenance work to remain with the yard in Nova Scotia. The federal government is looking at splitting up maintenance work on the Canadian navy's frigates between Irving and Davie in Quebec. It is facing objections from Irving and its workers. The Irving employees warn the change will mean lost jobs in Nova Scotia. There are seven frigates that will need maintenance on the east coast over a five-year period. But military and Department of National Defence officials are concerned the Irving yard in Halifax won't be able to handle all the work as it will also be in the midst of building the new fleet of Canadian Surface Combatant warships. There are concerns that the navy's capabilities could suffer if the work isn't split up between Davie and Irving yards. Each of the aging Halifax-class frigates will require about a year of maintenance work, and in 2020 the navy expects maintenance will be needed on two frigates at the same time. Irving argues it needs all the Halifax-class work and the construction of two more AOPS so it doesn't face any downturn in activity at the yard. “ We are hopeful that the Government of Canada will continue the work at Halifax Shipyard,” Irving spokesman Sean Lewis said of the frigate maintenance. Asked about the need for two more AOPS, Lewis stated the following: “We continue to work closely with the Government of Canada to explore the overall transition between the Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship (AOPS) and Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) programs. The construction of additional AOPS for Canada or international export opportunities is being considered and various options pursued. At this time it is premature to comment further.” In response to Irving's push, Davie official Frédérik Boisvert has noted that while Irving has $ 65 billion in contracts from the federal government and 1900 workers, Davie has received less than $ 1billion in contracts and has less than 200 people working and 1400 laid off workers, waiting to be recalled. “If they (Irving) are concerned about Nova Scotian jobs, they should explain to their union workers why they are building their own tugs in Eastern Europe,” Boisvert added. https://lfpress.com/news/national/defence-watch/irving-shipbuilding-pushing-for-two-more-arctic-offshore-patrol-ships-all-halifax-class-work/